BR100 Increased By (1.02%)
BR30 Increased By (1.71%)
KSE100 Increased By (0.58%)
KSE30 Increased By (0.65%)
BECO 6.03 Increased By ▲ 0.26 (4.51%)
BML 52.61 Decreased By ▼ -0.39 (-0.74%)
BOP 34.23 Increased By ▲ 0.24 (0.71%)
CNERGY 8.16 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.62%)
DCL 12.23 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.25%)
FCCL 53.80 Increased By ▲ 0.97 (1.84%)
FCSC 5.24 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (3.35%)
FFL 18.03 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (0.45%)
FNEL 1.30 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.78%)
HUMNL 11.00 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (1.1%)
KEL 8.07 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.62%)
KOSM 5.39 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-2.36%)
MLCF 87.90 Increased By ▲ 1.39 (1.61%)
NBP 186.60 Increased By ▲ 1.44 (0.78%)
PACE 10.75 Increased By ▲ 0.17 (1.61%)
PAEL 39.95 Increased By ▲ 0.53 (1.34%)
PIAHCLA 26.19 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.11%)
PIBTL 17.32 Increased By ▲ 0.65 (3.9%)
PPL 233.49 Increased By ▲ 5.31 (2.33%)
PRL 34.98 Increased By ▲ 0.30 (0.87%)
PTC 67.71 Increased By ▲ 2.38 (3.64%)
SEARL 90.90 Increased By ▲ 0.77 (0.85%)
SSGC 27.20 Increased By ▲ 0.60 (2.26%)
TELE 8.57 Increased By ▲ 0.29 (3.5%)
THCCL 60.85 Increased By ▲ 2.35 (4.02%)
TPLP 8.78 Increased By ▲ 0.56 (6.81%)
TREET 24.65 Increased By ▲ 0.12 (0.49%)
TRG 71.50 Increased By ▲ 1.79 (2.57%)
WAVES 10.01 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.7%)
WTL 1.27 Decreased By ▼ -0.01 (-0.78%)

ISLAMABAD: The Federal Tax Ombudsman (FTO) has directed the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to dispose of pending tax refund claims for the tax year 2018 and to ensure that the commissioner concerned revisit the instant case.

The complainant was a government servant whose application for Tax Year 2018 was rejected on the basis that evidence of tax deduction was not attached with application.

The FTO sought Secretary Revenue Division for comments, the Chief Commissioner–IR RTO informed that complainants application for refund had already been rejected as there was no refund application pending.

During investigation of the subject complaint, the FTO has made observation that in the instant case order u/s 170(4) is a classical example of departmental inattention and incompetence as; one page order dated 19th August 2020 for TY 2018 categorically states at Para 3 of the order that; “Necessary evidence of tax payments is placed on record.”

However, in the concluding Para of same order, the officer opines, “that the taxpayer neither furnished any evidence regarding tax deduction manually nor attached any evidence in support of refund claimed. In view of above facts of the case, the refund application is rejected.” Contradiction and carelessness are more than evident, no opportunity of hearing was given to the aggrieved taxpayer prior to passing the rejection order.

In addition to departmental attention, tax deduction mainly relates to section 236K which was CNIC based and internally verifiable from the FBR’s portal. In view of the above, the tax ombudsman directed the FBR to pay the tax refund for the tax year 2018 to the aggrieved taxpayer as per law and the commissioner concerned revisits the impugned order for TY2018.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2022

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.